METSquire doesn't like the new draft compensation rule (discussed here).

With no ceiling on bonuses, the best players will still not necessarily be selected by the worst teams, thus the point of the draft, to create talent balance in the league, is still not being effectuated. The fact that a team will have a chance to pick in the same slot next year if they can't sign this year's selection doesn't solve the problem: why would the Royals or the Devil Rays be any more likely to sign a pick next year when they couldn't sign a pick this year?

And, while players will now know by August 16th whether they have been signed or not by the team that selected them in the draft, some players will still go unsigned and will miss out on a year of development in a Major League system. Thus, my concerns have really not been addressed by the changes in the new Agreement and, unfortunately, the league and the players have missed an opportunity to fix this flawed system.

Let's take this to an extreme. Why are there signing bonuses at all? Before the draft, players were free agents until they signed with a major league club, and then the reserve clause kicked in. The time players could sell their services was at this time, and teams bid for players, often signing them to large amounts of money. This is where the term bonus baby comes from. Then, as today, the low revenue teams felt they couldn't compete with the high revenue teams, so the draft was instituted. This removal of almost all bargaining power from the players led to the formation of a union.

The only leverage the player had left was the fact that if a team didn't sign him, he could reenter the draft the next year. So players picked up bonuses to sign with a team, especially if they were considered top prospects. And until free agency came into being, this was the only leverage players had against teams.

But free agency changed that. The rules are now the big payday comes after you've played in the majors for six years. But the draft rules remained in place, and of course agents and players took advantage of these. If in fact, the draft is supposed to help the weak teams, there is a simple solution. Take away any bargaining power by drafted players. Any player would be placed under control of the team that drafted him period. If a player doesn't want to work for that team, he can find something else to do. He'll get his big payday when he proves he can play major league baseball, not before. The reason bonuses existed in the past is no longer valid. Players get a chance at the big pay day eventually.

Now, as a free market person, I don't really like that idea. Players should have as much choice as possible. One way to help would be the ability of teams to trade or sell draft choices. I don't know the objections to this on either side, but it would give teams more flexibility. Team A can't sign prospect X for whatever reason, but Team B can. Team B can trade a prospect of it's own, or even an established player. It seems like an obvious thing to do.

And finally, why can't teams pony up the money for draft choices? The league is awash in money. Revenue sharing is lining the pockets of low revenue clubs. If they're not going to spend the money on player salaries, at least spend it on draft picks.